Posted by seamar_116 on 10/11/2012 9:56:00 AM (view original):<<We are the top dog and as we discovered in another thread the lower dogs always go after the top dog.>>

"We" did not discover this another post. You were totally refuted and were totally unable to explain what you meant to ANYONE who read and commented on your inane post.

3 people, all of whom share your political alliance.

I laid out the facts. 1st and 2nd always fight. You tried to use semantics and technicalites, but it is true. You know it.

You did no such thing. 1-2 do not always fight. If by semantics and technicalities you mean "facts" then yes I did. And totally schooled you. Even got a "good post" comment from one of the conservatives on the board. You are just plain ignorant of history and economics. All you have are your "feelings" and "beliefs."

Posted by swamphawk22 on 10/12/2012 3:37:00 AM (view original):I laid out the history of 1 and 2 fighting and your response was things like who was #1 between Nato and Warsaw Pact.

It was my data vs your recnicalities

No actually, my response was a historical look at war from the Greeks on. I can go back and find the post if you want. But you know it was far more comprehensive than what you are claiming. And you did not lay out any objective way of measuring 1 and 2. You are just making **** up...like Romney-Ryan. Employing the old Gish-Gallup Swamp...and you are not getting away with it.

Oman last year was at 6% of GDP. So should we fear Oman? Oman spent about 3x the % of its GDP than China. So what statement would you make based on that data? Obviously one also has to consider the size of the economy as well to make sense of military spending (or any spending for that matter, including health care.) Your simplistic look at one stat and use that to mean something is ludicrous.